John Carmack tweets about plans for a new texture option in the upcoming patch for the Windows PC edition" of RAGE, id's new first person shooter: "We have a bicubic-upsample+detail texture option for the next PC patch that will help alleviate the blurry textures in Rage." A follow up tweet offers more on this: "@DesignerDon our first test of a higher res page file didn't help much, because most source textures didn't actually have any more detail."

I played Rage on my PS3 and personally the game is fun but way to short. 2 levels.... really?!... with some small area's scattered in between the 2 towns to get your murder on and complete quests, I am really disapointed with Id Software on this game. I know i didnt keep up with the news on this game as it was being made but i recall reading that this game was going to be a destructable enviroment... amoung other things that i did NOT see in this game. And are they not going to fix the screen tearing on the consoles?

1) Run at you.2) Sit behind cover and fire at you in the same three animations over and over and over and over again.3) Switch cover randomly.4) Flee.And that's it. Repeat 20,000 times.

For some reason statements like this really annoy me.If I start shooting at you what options do you have precisely ?Flaking is almost impossible in most of the room layouts and is basically a process of switching cover - during which time you shoot me. They also throw grenades.So what other magically moves should they do?Yes sometimes they switch cover when it seems a silly thing to do but then staying still is pretty silly 'cos someone will just lob a primed grenade at you.Come on, I'm waiting to be amazed at same cleaver move that's never been seem before from an AI in a FPS.

Fallout 3 alone had much better textures, much better distances and much better particle effects/water/fog/etc. Even little things like having "e" take all items or allowing a button for running forward without input is something most RPG ports do not think about.

Wait, the console versions don't have the run toggle or Take All? I find that really surprising, though I haven't played any of the console versions. I guess I should give them more credit. Now if only they would tailor the UI for the PC.

Verno wrote on Oct 18, 2011, 10:01:That's not true, it literally uses Origin for a validation launcher and nothing more. It has two web plugins it uses for VoIP and Friends list functionality. It's not the same as Steam either but whatever, we're getting far off topic.

Well if ME3, Reckoning and Syndicate require Origin then I'll be right there complaining about it, so... we don't really disagree. I am just saying I'm not counting on it until they do it.

uses Origin's communication functions extensively | If you don't see how it could be different from Mass Effect 3 in requiring Origin, well... agree to disagree.

That's not true, it literally uses Origin for a validation launcher and nothing more. It has two web plugins it uses for VoIP and Friends list functionality. It's not the same as Steam either but whatever, we're getting far off topic.

Verno wrote on Oct 18, 2011, 09:09:Actually it's confirmed to require Origin in retail. So much for Origin's sole advantage. I'll bet all upcoming games not already in development require Origin, why wouldn't EA do that? It's their only chance to one up Steam as they don't even have parity on the feature front. And if we were talking about Steam and there was a single exception to something you would state the entire rule was void so I'm just playing the flipside here.

Well it's an online focused game that launched from a web browser and uses Origin's communication functions extensively. If you don't see how it could be different from Mass Effect 3 in requiring Origin, well... agree to disagree.

As for eating crow I have no idea what that is about. Not needing to run the client is benefit over Steam. If they start requiring the client then it's the same as Steam. There's no real crow to eat there.

"Average" is still leagues ahead of RAGE's abysmal port, even if that were the case. It's not, though.

I wouldn't call Rage an abysmal port, it wasn't really QA'd very much and suffers from some consolitis but overall it's better than most I've played.

You mean... one? That was a beta?

Actually it's confirmed to require Origin in retail. So much for Origin's sole advantage. I'll bet all upcoming games not already in development require Origin, why wouldn't EA do that? It's their only chance to one up Steam as they don't even have parity on the feature front. And if we were talking about Steam and there was a single exception to something you would state the entire rule was void so I'm just playing the flipside here.

And then at that point it will be the same as Steam, a DRM system millions upon millions seem to think is fine, so...

Jerykk wrote on Oct 17, 2011, 12:26:The PC ports of Bethesda's RPGs aren't all that great. Bethesda puts minimal effort into them. They don't even redesign the UI, which is why UI mods are among the first mods to be made. I'll give them credit for releasing mod tools but the actual ports themselves are simply average.

"Average" is still leagues ahead of RAGE's abysmal port, even if that were the case. It's not, though.

Jerykk wrote on Oct 17, 2011, 12:26:The PC ports of Bethesda's RPGs aren't all that great. Bethesda puts minimal effort into them. They don't even redesign the UI, which is why UI mods are among the first mods to be made. I'll give them credit for releasing mod tools but the actual ports themselves are simply average.

Have you played the 360 versions of Fallout 3 and Oblivion? The PC versions are drastically better, even before mod tools. Fallout 3 alone had much better textures, much better distances and much better particle effects/water/fog/etc. Even little things like having "e" take all items or allowing a button for running forward without input is something most RPG ports do not think about.

Now they don't tailor the gameplay or menus to the PC like Deus Ex 3 for example, this much is true. On the scale of port quality though I would still give them high marks, especially when you consider the mentioned mod tools.

I don't think you can blame Bethesda. Not when their own games have such great PC versions.

The PC ports of Bethesda's RPGs aren't all that great. Bethesda puts minimal effort into them. They don't even redesign the UI, which is why UI mods are among the first mods to be made. I'll give them credit for releasing mod tools but the actual ports themselves are simply average.

wrlwnd wrote on Oct 16, 2011, 09:43:Why Carmack thought this was a good way to go is beyond me. It makes no sense.

Oh, no. It makes PERFECT sense.

Tech 5 allows him to have a good looking game (for consoles) that runs at 60fps on consoles. Every other FPS on consoles runs at 30fps. That's a huge difference, and so they're banking on that particular fact selling them millions of copies.

Nope, that makes no sense at all. Not when those same console gamers are perfectly happy to play the CODs at 30fps with an upscaled 1040x608/960x544 resolution. They obviously couldn't care less.

And Carmack obviously thought that he COULD make them care. If you don't think that the 60fps thing was one of THE major selling points of Rage, seeing as how it was mentioned in pretty much every single interview and preview they did, I don't know what to tell you.

StingingVelvet wrote on Oct 16, 2011, 19:58:Also you can run Origin games without Origin running, making its memory footprint a moot point.

You can't say this as a generalism anymore, there are enough games out now and coming out that can't run without Origin that it's certainty is questionable at best. It's a lame duck marketing bullet point, the equivalent of some fanboy saying "you can close steam after launching non-steamworks games".

All of this kerfuffle about Rage is pretty funny in my opinion. From what I've played its a slightly above average FPS game with good AI, that's about it. I definitely regret dropping $60 on it and doubt anyone will be chatting about this game a year from now outside of "is this any good? Its on a steam sale".

wrlwnd wrote on Oct 16, 2011, 09:43:Why Carmack thought this was a good way to go is beyond me. It makes no sense.

Oh, no. It makes PERFECT sense.

Tech 5 allows him to have a good looking game (for consoles) that runs at 60fps on consoles. Every other FPS on consoles runs at 30fps. That's a huge difference, and so they're banking on that particular fact selling them millions of copies.

Nope, that makes no sense at all. Not when those same console gamers are perfectly happy to play the CODs at 30fps with an upscaled 1040x608/960x544 resolution. They obviously couldn't care less.

Jerykk wrote on Oct 16, 2011, 19:39:id isn't Blizzard or Valve. Their games aren't guaranteed to sell at least 5 million units and they don't have any steady source of revenue to fall back on. That's why they agreed to be bought out by Bethesda/Zenimax. Bethesda/Zenimax published the game, so they decided which platforms to release on and which platforms to focus on. Like most other publishers, they decided to focus on consoles.

I don't think you can blame Bethesda. Not when their own games have such great PC versions.

theyarecomingforyou wrote on Oct 17, 2011, 00:51:rather than the faux open-world that RAGE went for.

I knew Rage wouldn't be open world based off the previews, but I had no idea just how shockingly claustrophobic it really is. Even the "wasteland" is a few intersecting corridors. And then you STILL have to fucking load every settlement or area that you go into. Bethesda has people howling for their blood for having a world the size of Fallout 3 (or Oblivion) and needing to load every time you go into a town or house. Now Rage comes along and their "world" is like 1/10000th of the size of Bethesda's games.

Carmack could have easily made this game with the Doom 3 engine, and it probably would have looked better too...

Anyway, I finished it, the ending sucks, in fact the entire final few missions just suck. Capital Prime is just a base with endlessly repeating textures and hallways (Megatexture!) and hordes of boring, poor AI enemies, leading to a final battle that's probably the biggest letdown of an FPS final battle since... crap, I don't even know.

I liked the towns, I liked the atmosphere, I liked some of the mini games, I like the character given to the NPCs (though they needed more to say), and I really liked the driving.

I also thought that some of the maps, even including the fact that everything was claustrophobic as shit, were awesome. Dead City was fantastic, even if it looks nowhere NEAR what id kept lying it would look like, and the grand central station (blue line) map was awesome too.

Great variety of guns and ammo, with some really fun applications in them. However, in the end, you use it against 3 different types of enemies that

1) Run at you.2) Sit behind cover and fire at you in the same three animations over and over and over and over again.3) Switch cover randomly.4) Flee.

And that's it. Repeat 20,000 times.

I advice everyone to play Rage on Easy mode. That way you don't have to sit there and take 20 potshots at a single bandit behind cover only to have to repeat it for his next 200 buddies. On Easy you can just run around, throwing wingsticks, unleashing spider bots, blasting buckshot, etc, and it makes it a lot more invigorating and fun.

But in the end, to me, Rage is a huge letdown, not least of all because all the promised and much-bandied graphics prowess just isn't there. Outside the game looks great. Inside, where 70% of the game takes place, it just looks like ass.

And then there's a few (mini) boss battles, which are just beyond laughably easy.

That's really all there is. Now, most shooters these days do that, so it's not as if I'm bashing Rage for it and give other games a pass. Call of Duty has had exactly one enemy in its SP games ever since it first came out. But what's happened to all the cool variety you got in Doom and Quake? If you put Rage's enemy makeup into Doom, you'd have:

That's not considered a "huge variety of enemies."In fact, when other games do this by just putting the same monster back out there, only this time it's blue instead of green, they get lambasted for it.

And you're seriously trying to argue that Rage has large variety in the enemies?

@Yosemite Sam - Far Cry 2 and Borderlands both had better vehicles. The former went for the more realistic first person approach; the latter didn't have the same realism but using the mouse to control movement made it respond more naturally, as well as having better physics (though still not realistic). I'm not claiming either game has great vehicle handling - they both have their flaws - but to me they were more enjoyable in context. The physics in RAGE are just shockingly poor.

As for the NPCs, it was fucking annoying that every time I wanted to buy anything I had to wait for the same canned speech to finish just to interact with them. And I gave up talking to all the NPCs because they had bugger all to say. Each time it was something bland that contributed nothing to the gameworld, usually just a repeating what they said before.

Characters just weren't developed:

1) Hagar rescues you and then bails after sending you on a few fetch missions. You have even less interaction with the other Hagar members.2) Sheriff Black of Wellspring does the same thing. As does Mayor Clayton.3) Redstone sends you on a few pointless missions to gain his respect and then disappears for the rest of the game. Very pointless.4) The resistance hide in the basement of Subway Town, with no indication that they actually do anything at all. And the build-up before the end... it's a joke. Nothing is explained.5) The Authority didn't have a single enemy that represented them or had any dialogue. Why are you meant to hate them? I'd rather work with them than Redstone.7) Mick the Mechanic says a few stereotypical black things but doesn't do anything more than that8) Mel, voiced by Claudia Black (amazing actress), has THE most pointless role in the game. Complete waste of voice talent. Pathetic.

The characters had no depth and throw-away dialogue. The fact you mention actively checking what they all had to say between missions shows obsessive behaviour, not engagement in the game-world. You want definitive characters like Half-Life 2: Alyx Vance, Eli Vance, the G-Man, Barney, Dr Kleiner... that's all off the top of my head. There's no characters like that in RAGE. A large part of that is that you spend no time with them - you get a few missions but you never really build a relationship. Certainly there's no emotional connection.

I'm keeping my eye on games that will actually have some depth and substantial gameplay. Games like Skyrim, Borderlands 2 and Far Cry 3. Games that are open-world, rather than the faux open-world that RAGE went for.